To: SeekAndFind
E.J. Dionne's argument :
Internal Revenue Service data show that the effective federal income tax rate for the 400 taxpayers with the very highest incomes declined by nearly half in just over a decade, even as their pre-tax incomes have grown five times larger.
The study found that the top 400 households "paid 16.6 percent of their income in federal individual income taxes in 2007, down from 30 percent in 1995." We are talking here about truly rich people. Using 2007 dollars, it took an adjusted gross income of at least $35 million to make the top 400 in 1992, and $139 million in 2007.
The notion that when we are fighting two wars, we're not supposed to consider raising taxes on such Americans is one sign of a country that's no longer serious. Why do so few foreign policy hawks acknowledge that if they lack the gumption to ask taxpayers to finance the projection of American military power, we won't be able to project it in the long run?
And if we are unwilling to have a full-scale debate over whether nation-building abroad is getting in the way of nation-building at home, we will accomplish neither.
To: SeekAndFind
I read the dead tree version this morning,
and EJ’s justification “reasons” really contained no reason for raising taxes on “the rich”.
7 posted on
07/29/2010 7:51:16 AM PDT by
MrB
(The difference between a (de)humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson